[aur-general] AUR & Copyright

Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkovsky at gmail.com
Mon Feb 7 05:38:43 EST 2011

On 7 February 2011 11:22, Sebastian Wiesner <lunaryorn at googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2011/2/7 Lukáš Jirkovský <l.jirkovsky at gmail.com>:
>> I think Creative Commons is a good choice for PKGBUILDs in AUR. It can
>> be almost as permissible as public domain while still valid in most
>> jurisdictions (actually I don't know any where it isn't).
> Creative Commons itself does not recommend CC licences for software
> [1], and – being written in bash – PKGBUILDs arguably qualify as
> "software".
> [1] http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Commons_license_for_software.3F

I think most PKGBUILDs are too simple to be considered software. Even
then the fact CC is not recommend for software doesn't mean it's
prohibited. In my opinion the license should be as permissive as
possible. Given the fact some already mentioned using public domain
suggests I'm not the only one who thinks so. The problem is that
public domain isn't valid in many jurisdictions. CC is.


More information about the aur-general mailing list